Cited by 328Sports Performance and TrainingSport Psychology and PerformanceSports injuries and prevention

Monitoring Fatigue Status in Elite Team-Sport Athletes: Implications for Practice

Open access
Thorpe, Robin T., Atkinson, Greg, Drust, Barry, Gregson, Warren·2017·International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance

Abstract

The increase in competition demands in elite team sports over recent years has prompted much attention from researchers and practitioners to the monitoring of adaptation and fatigue in athletes. Monitoring fatigue and gaining an understanding of athlete status may also provide insights and beneficial information pertaining to player availability, injury, and illness risk. Traditional methods used to quantify recovery and fatigue in team sports, such as maximal physical-performance assessments, may not be feasible to detect variations in fatigue status throughout competitive periods. Faster, simpler, and nonexhaustive tests such as athlete self-report measures, autonomic nervous system response via heart-rate-derived indices, and to a lesser extent, jump protocols may serve as promising tools to quantify and establish fatigue status in elite team-sport athletes. The robust rationalization and precise detection of a meaningful fluctuation in these measures are of paramount importance for practitioners working alongside athletes and coaches on a daily basis. There are various methods for arriving at a minimal clinically important difference, but these have been rarely adopted by sport scientists and practitioners. The implementation of appropriate, reliable, and sensitive measures of fatigue can provide important information to key stakeholders in team-sport environments. Future research is required to investigate the sensitivity of these tools to fundamental indicators such as performance, injury, and illness.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1123/ijspp.2016-0434

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Thorpe, R. T., Atkinson, G., Drust, B., & Gregson, W.
Affiliations
Manchester United PLC (GB)
Corresponding author
Thorpe, Robin T.
Venue
International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance
Published
2017-04
Volume
12
Issue
s2
Pages
S2-27-S2-34
ISSN
  • 1555-0265 (ISSN-L)
  • 1555-0273
OpenAlex
W2576408894
Cited by
328
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 37 · 2025: 38 · 2024: 45 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 46 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 5
FWCI
4.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • TeesRep (Teesside University) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Liverpool John Moores University (acceptedVersion)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Sports Performance and Training
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Sport Psychology and Performance
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Sports injuries and prevention
Keywords
fatigue monitoring, heart rate variability, autonomic responses, minimal clinically important difference, recovery, injury risk, disease risk, player availability, training load
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Physiological, Fatigue, Humans, Monitoring, Physiologic, Sports, Athletic Performance, Athletes, Self Report

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review